SlothB77:Health insurance did not exist before Obamacare.He had no health insurance options before Obamacare.Because of Obamacare, he would automatically have health insurance now.

none of these statements are true.

I'm not sure what your point is.

Before ACA:--He had no insurance.--His employer had crap "group coverage" that wasn't really insurance.--He had to go to charity to pay his medical expenses.

If ACA had been in place:--His employer would have actually had to provide real insurance (better for him) or tell him to find insurance on his own (effectively the same as now).--If he didn't have employer provided insurance, he would have had to buy his own insurance (better for him), or have willingly refused to purchase insurance (same as now, with small penalty)--When he got sick, he would have his expenses paid for by insurance (much better for him), or if he had refused coverage would have to rely on charity to pay his medical expenses (same as now).

So if the ACA had been fully in effect he'd either be in exactly the same boat as he's in now, or he'd be much better off. So where's the downside of the ACA?

My brother-in-law is one of these idiots... Lives in MA, never got insurance and has been paying the fine every year. He had a heart attack a few months back, and the hospital enrolled him in MAHealth as he was unemployed and had no income...

Dumbass fills his prescriptions without using the insurance he now has and still pisses and moans how he can't afford his medication.

keylock71:My brother-in-law is one of these idiots... Lives in MA, never got insurance and has been paying the fine every year. He had a heart attack a few months back, and the hospital enrolled him in MAHealth as he was unemployed and had no income...

Dumbass fills his prescriptions without using the insurance he now has and still pisses and moans how he can't afford his medication.

Maybe he should have the hospital check him out for brain damage as well?

TedCruz'sCrazyDad:make me some tea: He should just make himself rich so he doesn't have to rely on the handouts from liberals.

He sure wasn't very boot-strappy for a Republican.

Isn't that kind of what conservative/teabaggy/libertarian types believe, though? Yes, it's your own fault if you're poor because bootstraps and comma therefore. But don't they also think that if people are poor and need assistance that providing it should not be a government function but it should be provided by private charity? So taking charity doesn't make him a traitor to his beliefs. He's somehow entitled to charity because he's inherently better than others or something. So he's got that going for him, which is nice.

sdd2000:keylock71: My brother-in-law is one of these idiots... Lives in MA, never got insurance and has been paying the fine every year. He had a heart attack a few months back, and the hospital enrolled him in MAHealth as he was unemployed and had no income...

Dumbass fills his prescriptions without using the insurance he now has and still pisses and moans how he can't afford his medication.

Maybe he should have the hospital check him out for brain damage as well?

Seriously... I've been of the opinion he has some mental issues for a long time.

And yes, he's a total hard-core, right-wing, GOP voting stooge. Listens to Limbaugh, hates Obama, hates Liz Warren, still has a Scott Brown sticker on his car, complains about the lazy "moochers", etc. etc.

I just make sure I don't talk politics when he's over for the holidays.

MrSplifferton:Why is insurance rates with coveredca twice that of utahs fed exchange?

They also have a lot less options...

To be honest I prefer half price with crappy website...

The insurance company's answer is that it's cheaper to insure someone in Utah compared to California.

The real answer? Because Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats refused to allow a vote on either a national exchange system or a public option. Both of these things would have placed further downward pressure on costs.

make me some tea:Serious Black: make me some tea: He should just make himself rich so he doesn't have to rely on the handouts from liberals.

Difficulty: Daily Kos set up a fund and a bunch of their readers donated money towards his health care.

That's the delicious part.

I've been wondering something. Does it seem odd to you (or anyone else really) that cases like this and Jim Inhofe show the libbiest of the liberals are more empathetic to people outside of their tribe than conservatives are to people inside their tribe?

Serious Black:make me some tea: Serious Black: make me some tea: He should just make himself rich so he doesn't have to rely on the handouts from liberals.

Difficulty: Daily Kos set up a fund and a bunch of their readers donated money towards his health care.

That's the delicious part.

I've been wondering something. Does it seem odd to you (or anyone else really) that cases like this and Jim Inhofe show the libbiest of the liberals are more empathetic to people outside of their tribe than conservatives are to people inside their tribe?

Level of empathy for those in situations you've never personally experienced is one of the foundations of why people are on the left or right.

make me some tea:Serious Black: make me some tea: He should just make himself rich so he doesn't have to rely on the handouts from liberals.

Difficulty: Daily Kos set up a fund and a bunch of their readers donated money towards his health care.

That's the delicious part.

....So he could get healthy and launch incrediby vicious and hateful attacks on them.

You know why people don't like liberals? Because they lose. If liberals are so farking smart, how come they lose so goddamn always? - The Newsroom

What do you think wopuld have happened if Markos Moulitsas got sick due to his own stupidity? I guarantee you someone from Powerline, Twitchy, Instapundit, Redstate and/or Gateway Pundit would have snuck into the hospital and tried to pull the plug. Good God, liberals. Grow a pair, would you?!

nmrsnr:If ACA had been in place:--His employer would have actually had to provide real insurance (better for him) or tell him to find insurance on his own (effectively the same as now).--If he didn't have employer provided insurance, he would have had to buy his own insurance (better for him), or have willingly refused to purchase insurance (same as now, with small penalty)--When he got sick, he would have his expenses paid for by insurance (much better for him), or if he had refused coverage would have to rely on charity to pay his medical expenses (same as now).

-- Affordable insurance would be available to him without an employer-sponsored group plan.

Bungles:Serious Black: make me some tea: Serious Black: make me some tea: He should just make himself rich so he doesn't have to rely on the handouts from liberals.

Difficulty: Daily Kos set up a fund and a bunch of their readers donated money towards his health care.

That's the delicious part.

I've been wondering something. Does it seem odd to you (or anyone else really) that cases like this and Jim Inhofe show the libbiest of the liberals are more empathetic to people outside of their tribe than conservatives are to people inside their tribe?

Level of empathy for those in situations you've never personally experienced is one of the foundations of why people are on the left or right.

I'm well aware that liberals tend to rate higher on avoidance of harm on the moral foundations test. But if you can't muster up empathy for somebody in your own tribe, then what's the point of tribal behavior in the first place?

keylock71:My brother-in-law is one of these idiots... Lives in MA, never got insurance and has been paying the fine every year. He had a heart attack a few months back, and the hospital enrolled him in MAHealth as he was unemployed and had no income...

Dumbass fills his prescriptions without using the insurance he now has and still pisses and moans how he can't afford his medication.

You should maybe attack him from a different direction. Tell him that he is sticking it to the liberals when he fills his prescriptions using the insurance. After all when he pays full price he's subsidizing some lazy bastards, right? Then everyone wins. He gets his meds and saves money, plus he feels like he is hurting his political rivals.

ShawnDoc:MrSplifferton: I would have thought the state exchanges would have gotten a better deal then states using the fed exchange.

Who is running the exchange shouldn't have any effect on prices. Its simply a way to make it easier to compare plans.

My hunch is California has higher medical costs due to a larger uninsured population running up costs by using the ER as free healthcare.

I guess I was confused on that part. It had sounded like state run exchanges would have their insurance commissioner negotiate prices, while the fed exchange would not have had that luxury. Which is why I figured states would be able to get a better deal then the fed exchange.

Still $500/month is a big difference in cost, I wouldn't expect the difference to be that huge.

So much this. I've attended my fair share of charity bowling fundraisers for a couple who needed help paying off medical bills for their twins who were born premature and in the NICU for months. And I've heard my fair share of people complaining about the ACA and 'soshulizm' during these events. The parents or family never said anything about the subject....it was just a few of the attendees saying this crap. But the fact that they believe a damn bowling tourney every year is going to cover hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical bills is what simply kills me.

ShawnDoc:MrSplifferton: I would have thought the state exchanges would have gotten a better deal then states using the fed exchange.

Who is running the exchange shouldn't have any effect on prices. Its simply a way to make it easier to compare plans.

My hunch is California has higher medical costs due to a larger uninsured population running up costs by using the ER as free healthcare.

This is my hunch as well. More ethnically homogenous states see more willing participation in these kinds of systems. The ACA penalty for no insurance is greater than zero, but probably not high enough to overcome Joe Sixpack's reluctance to pay even more to fund the care of people he doesn't know, doesn't like, and assumes must have fallen ill thru fault of their own.

GentDirkly:ShawnDoc: MrSplifferton: I would have thought the state exchanges would have gotten a better deal then states using the fed exchange.

Who is running the exchange shouldn't have any effect on prices. Its simply a way to make it easier to compare plans.

My hunch is California has higher medical costs due to a larger uninsured population running up costs by using the ER as free healthcare.

This is my hunch as well. More ethnically homogenous states see more willing participation in these kinds of systems. The ACA penalty for no insurance is greater than zero, but probably not high enough to overcome Joe Sixpack's reluctance to pay even more to fund the care of people he doesn't know, doesn't like, and assumes must have fallen ill thru fault of their own.

It will be a pretty hefty payment by 2016. Someone who makes $1,000,000 but doesn't have insurance will be paying $25,000 at that time. That's more expensive than anything I've heard of except for plans that are literally written on solid gold paper.

keylock71:My brother-in-law is one of these idiots... Lives in MA, never got insurance and has been paying the fine every year. He had a heart attack a few months back, and the hospital enrolled him in MAHealth as he was unemployed and had no income...

Dumbass fills his prescriptions without using the insurance he now has and still pisses and moans how he can't afford his medication.